History
  • No items yet
midpage
Wells v. Van Arnam
271 So. 2d 186
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
1973
Check Treatment
PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. The “action” contemplated by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.420(e), 30 F.S.A., in prosecuting a case of necessity involves actions which result in contact by one party with the opposing party or the court. A party cannot for a year involve himself solely in the preparation of a case, never initiate any action with the opposing party and then argue that the case should not be dismissed as he, without the participation of the opposing counsel or the court, has been contacting witnesses, researching the case or planning trial strategy. See Adams Engineering Company v. Construction Products Corporation, 156 So.2d 497 (Fla.1963); Eastern Elevator, Inc. v. Page, 263 So.2d 218 (Fla.1972); and Musselman Steel Fabricators, Inc. v. Radziwon, 263 So.2d 221 (Fla.1972).

RAWLS, Acting C. J., JOHNSON, J., and NESBITT, JOSEPH, Associate Judge, concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Wells v. Van Arnam
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: Jan 9, 1973
Citation: 271 So. 2d 186
Docket Number: No. R-122
Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.